If she was 15 at the time of the incident then he would of been 17 since she was born in 1967 and he was born in 1965.
There is nothing to investigate! This is a nearly 40 year old allegation. There’s no evidence available. The only thing anyone can do is ask for testimony under oath, and you don’t need the FBI to do that.
2 Likes
Once again… you are losing the plot.
I will type it slower.
IF the allegations are true, it is not his actions as a 17 year old at issue.
It is his actions as a grown man denying the behavior of his 17 year old self that becomes important.
How is that a statement that can be denied in a rational manner?
Ok fine. But.
Why do you suppose the dems did not bring this up during the hearings? Do you think it was because they wanted to use it as a way to delay the vote until after the mid terms? Could this be a simple political maneuver? Yes or no?
Why do you suppose the dems did not bring this up during the hearings? Do you think it was because they wanted to use it as a way to delay the vote until after the mid terms? Could this be a simple political maneuver? 
Yes…Him and George Zimmerman were both right in their actions.
One doesnt get to bash another’s head into the concrete because he is 17. Unfortunately he learned that lesson the hard way.
But was he as amazing as Bruce Dickinson?
Not a valid argument. If the alleged sexual assault did occur then Kavanaugh shouldn’t sit on the SCOTUS.
There is no way to even remotely get to the truth.
But one gets to sexually assault somebody and it be shrugged off because “he’s just a kid”?
Nothing screams pathetic as someone trying to rationalize why someone may have sexually assaulted someone else.
I’m sorry to have to break this to you, but in the American Legal System, an “Allegation” isnt evidence.
One of those helicopter parents I hear of, huh? And HE was 17…
You know, sometimes you should just not Poe.
And it’s quite a shame you don’t know when you’ve stepped over the line.
Dude, your act isn’t believable, funny, or trollish at this point, just weird.
This thread is pretty depressing.
1 Like
From the story that I understand… this wasn’t even going to come to light until Feinstein’s hand was forced.
But yes… this should have been known weeks ago.
Hard to unscramble that egg now.
But… that seems to be a pivot in the conversation that you want to have since your… “They were kids” argument is really really bad.
Terrible actually.
The problem is that there is absolutely no possible way to prove it.
Why do you suppose the dems did not bring this up during the hearings? Do you think it was because they wanted to use it as a way to delay the vote until after the mid terms? Could this be a simple political maneuver? 
The woman isn’t alleging rape.
Fact is, if it can be convincingly proven that he did it but now denies it, he is not on the Court. If it cannot be convincingly shown that he did it, he is on the Court.
